Channel-bonding/VLAN with Scyld

Jerker Nyberg jerker at update.uu.se
Thu Jul 12 09:36:41 EDT 2001


Hello Niclas,

Sorry if I've missed something important here, but why isn't it possible
to use ordinary routing instead of channel bonding to split the traffic
between interfaces?

According to http://snafu.freedom.org/linux2.2/docs/ip-cref/ the
outgoing traffic could be split with "ip route add default scope link
nexthop dev eth0 nexthop dev eth1" or something like that.

For incoming traffic I do not know. A similiar route on every node for
every other node doesn't scale very well with many nodes I guess. Hmmm. Is
that the reason?

Regards,
Jerker Nyberg



On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Niclas Andersson wrote:
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 

> I had the same problems 2 years ago but I gave up bonding. It doesn't
> improve the latency (often more important than BW) and the stability
> is too low.
> 
> The problem is that both interfaces on one system use the same
> MAC-adress. Most switches do not tolerate two interfaces with the same
> MAC-adress not even on separate VLANs. (There are a few that does but
> can't remember them name of them now. The problem is that this piece
> of information may be a little bit tricky to find. Bonding a la Becker
> isn't that common in networks.)
> 
> I didn't succeed with bonding on HP2424. The reason may of course be the 
> D-link interfaces w. DEC21143 I used which sometimes have difficulties 
> negotiating.
> 
> What could work is the CISCO Ethernet channel which even the HP
> ProCurve has.  (Be certain that the OS in the switch is recent
> enough!) I'm not familiar with how that thing work. I only heard that
> it looked more or less the same as the becker-bonding...
> 
> 
> > I sent an email to the list last week regarding configuring our HP
> > Procurve 4000m switch for channel-bonding.  I am still having major
> > problems!!
> > 
> > If the OS was configured for channel-bonding without any switch
> > configuration, I got only 17Mbps :-( When I turned on trunking for
> > certain ports on the switch, I got about 100Mbps, which was only a
> > slight improvement from 1 NIC (plus, it was using SA/DA, so there was
> > no node-to-node bandwidth improvement).
> > 
> > I got a response suggesting that I should setup 2 VLANs, and have all
> > eth0's on VLAN-1 and all eth1's on VLAN-2.  The responder said that he
> > can get 190Mbps.  The trunking configuration is supposed to be for
> > switch to switch configurations.  He was using an HP 2400 (or was it
> > 2424?).  The manual I have is for both models, so I assume that it
> > will work with mine as well.
> > 
> > I am still having major difficulties with getting it to work with
> > Scyld.
> 
> Best regards,
> 	Niclas
> -- 
> Niclas Andersson                                E-mail: nican at nsc.liu.se
> National Supercomputer Centre                       Phone: +46 13 281464
> Linkoping University, S-581 83 Linkoping, Sweden      Fax: +46 13 282535
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
> 






_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf



More information about the Beowulf mailing list